2019 APICS Certification Exam Pass Rate Report

2019 Pass Rate Results

The following table of information details the final 2019 pass rate results by exam module and is broken down by North America, outside North America and global totals. For
historical purposes, four years of previous data is included.
Key

▪ NA = North America
▪ ONA=Outside North America
▪ PART 1= CPIM Part 1
▪ PART 2= CPIM Part 2
▪ BSCM = Basics of Supply Chain Management
▪ MPR = Master Planning of resources
▪ DSP = Detailed Scheduling and Planning
▪ ECO = Execution and Control Operations
▪ SMR = Strategic management of Resources
▪ CPIM = Certified in Production and Inventory Management
▪ CSCP = Certified Supply Chain Professional
▪ CLTD = Certified in Logistics Transportation and Distribution
▪ N/A = Not Applicable

ASCM.ORG
 2015 – 2019 APICS Exam Pass Data

2019
PART 1 PART 2 CSCP CLTD
NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total
78% 81% 80% 54% 64% 58% 65% 68% 66% 63% 65% 64%

2018
PART 1 PART 2 BSCM MRP DSP ECO SMR CSCP CLTD
NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total
79% 79% 79% 59% 65% 61% 70% 72% 71% 62% 69% 64% 63% 70% 66% 66% 69% 68% 59% 65% 62% 65% 60% 63% 73% 70% 72%

2017
BSCM MPR DSP ECO SMR CSCP CLTD
NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total
79% 81% 80% 65% 82% 71% 66% 79% 72% 71% 79% 75% 66% 76% 71% 69% 68% 68% 73% 66% 70%

2016
BSCM MPR DSP ECO SMR CSCP CLTD
NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total
75% 80% 78% 66% 82% 72% 66% 73% 69% 69% 75% 71% 66% 72% 69% 66% 66% 66% N/A N/A N/A

2015
BSCM MPR DSP ECO SMR CSCP CLTD
NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total NA ONA Total
75% 76% 76% 63% 73% 68% 64% 68% 66% 65% 72% 68% 66% 71% 68% 63% 59% 61% N/A N/A N/A

ASCM.ORG
Pass Rate Monitoring and Management
Exam pass rates are regularly monitored by the APICS Certification Committee, APICS Certification exam sub committees, psychometricians, and APICS staff
throughout a given year during a variety of exam management events:
▪ Exam pass rate reports are reviewed quarterly by APICS staff and the Certification Exam Committees.
▪ Exam questions are evaluated by PhD psychometricians on an ongoing basis to monitor statistical performance.
▪ Ongoing test development activity includes a review of question performance on individual forms with corrective action being taken to modify questions
that have statistical anomalies.
▪ Question performance is reviewed regularly during the Certification Exam Committees’ comprehensive pool reviews with corrective action being taken to
modify questions that have statistical anomalies.

Cut Score Process Overview

A Cut Score study is an exercise used to set the raw passing score for an exam. The raw score is determined to distinguish examinees that are minimally successful from
those who do not have sufficient knowledge to pass the exam. Because the focus of a certification exam is competence and not on advanced or expert skill levels and
knowledge, the purpose of this activity is to determine the performance of the “borderline” test taker and where that border between pass and fail should be set. Each
exam includes a section within the Exam Content Manual defining the criteria for the successful candidate as guidance to the candidate on where that border is set.

A cut score event is necessary for establishing a baseline minimal passing raw score for an exam when one of the following conditions occurs:
▪ When there are significant changes to the exam content outline.
▪ When there has been a significant shift in the exam’s body of knowledge resulting in more than 10% of new question content.
▪ When a combination of statistical anomalies occurs through periodic psychometric reviews.
▪ When launching a new certification exam product.

ASCM.ORG
The cut score event is performed with a group of 12–15 individuals that demographically mirror the types of candidates who are likely to take the exam. To participate in
the event, individuals must have the certification represented by the exam and be current in their certification. In addition, the group should be evenly balanced among the
following demographics:
▪ Varied professional experience from less than 5 years to over 25 years.
▪ Individuals with English as a second language for an international perspective.
▪ Instructors.
▪ A variety of industry vertical representation, such as manufacturing, healthcare, service.
▪ Up to two Certification Exam Committee members.
▪ PhD Psychometrician facilitator.

Two best practice psychometric approaches are used to derive the raw passing score: the modified Angoff method and the Hofstee approach. The Angoff method
specifically addresses the issue of borderline performance by requiring participants to retake the exam and estimate the performance of a minimally successful candidate
on each question of the test form. The Hofstee approach requires participants to provide their input on various parameters for the exam, including the minimum and
maximum acceptable percentage of passing candidates, and the minimum and maximum acceptable percentage of correct questions that should be required to pass the
exam. The results of both approaches are combined to provide a recommended score range from which the Certification Committee ratifies the final passing score.

Scaled Score Explanation

Exam scores are based on the number of questions answered correctly, which corresponds to the raw score set in the cut score event. However, each exam uses multiple
forms that all have different levels of difficulty, as different questions are used. To provide a standard range for test takers and allow direct comparison of results from one
administration to another, a scaled score approach is used to report final scores. The statistical process of converting the raw score into a scaled score table uses an
equating technique to ensure an equivalent passing standard is maintained across all forms of the exam. For more information on this topic, please refer to our white paper,
“Understanding a Scaled Score.”

ASCM.ORG